Pixalo Photography Community

Go Back   Pixalo Photography Community > Photography Forums > Cameras, Lenses and Accessories

Cameras, Lenses and Accessories: Discuss Canon 17-55 f2.8 USM or...?...Planning to get a "good" lens in the next couple of months for landscape photography. I figure stepping up to ...
Welcome to the Pixalo Photography Community. As a Guest you are free to browse the site, but see what extras you get as a Member here.


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 24-08-2007, 16:41   #1 (permalink)
New here
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 38
pwrbkdude is on a distinguished roadpwrbkdude is on a distinguished road
User's Gallery
Canon 17-55 f2.8 USM or...?

Planning to get a "good" lens in the next couple of months for landscape photography. I figure stepping up to a f2.8 lens would be a smart thing to do. Overall this lens has the benefits I would like to have.... Image Stabilization and f2.8. Anyone have any thoughts on this lens, or have a recommendation for a similar lens that is less expensive? Thanks in advance! -Dan
pwrbkdude is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 24-08-2007, 16:48   #2 (permalink)
Pixalo Crew
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 19,250
Steve is just really nice
Steve is just really niceSteve is just really niceSteve is just really niceSteve is just really niceSteve is just really niceSteve is just really niceSteve is just really niceSteve is just really niceSteve is just really niceSteve is just really nice

Image edit - ASK
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 17-55 f2.8 USM or...?

Why do you need a f2.8 and IS for landscape, surely you'll want to shoot using a bigger depth of field? I would say that if landscape is your main interest a good tripod would be more valuable than F2.8

I swear by my Canon 17-40L F4 USM. Its a bargain for the price.
Steve is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 24-08-2007, 16:52   #3 (permalink)
Forum Regular
 
_MB_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Northumberland, UK
Posts: 952
_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 17-55 f2.8 USM or...?

I'd agree large aperture and IS are an irrelevance for landscapes, unless you like taking them at night from a moving car!

As a walkabout do it all lens it looks ideal however.
_MB_ is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 24-08-2007, 17:03   #4 (permalink)
New here
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 38
pwrbkdude is on a distinguished roadpwrbkdude is on a distinguished road
User's Gallery
Re: Canon 17-55 f2.8 USM or...?

well i tend to shoot and dusk and at night frequently, and on long exposures even with a tripod sometimes there are small amounts of shake, so that is the main reason for desiring IS.

I am also thinking of a nice long lens for wildlife photography, and on that lends USM and IS are almost a requirement from what I understand???

Sorry for being a bit of a n00b... I've always just shot for the fun of it, but now am taking it as a bit more serious hobby as everyone keeps telling me I should do something with my photos!
pwrbkdude is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 24-08-2007, 17:08   #5 (permalink)
P-E
Part of the furniture
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sheffield, S.Yorkshire UK
Posts: 12,250
P-E is a name known to allP-E is a name known to allP-E is a name known to allP-E is a name known to all
P-E is a name known to allP-E is a name known to allP-E is a name known to allP-E is a name known to allP-E is a name known to all

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 17-55 f2.8 USM or...?

I've no experience of the 17-55 but from what I've read it does appear to suffer from dust getting inside.....as far as I'm aware it's not weather sealed.

My first thoughts would be the 17-40L f4 as Steve mentions above which is a highly recommended lens......this is weather sealed but will need a UV filter to complete the sealing.
P-E is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 24-08-2007, 17:10   #6 (permalink)
Forum Regular
 
_MB_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Northumberland, UK
Posts: 952
_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 17-55 f2.8 USM or...?

Re the long lens it very much depends on what kind of wildlife you're approaching/are approaching you and how tolerant they are.

I used to have a 300 f2.8 lens with no IS and noisy autofocus which didn't seem to bother birds and mammals particularly but I can easily see it being an issue with some species although how this compares to the effect of what appears like a gigantic eye to the creature being photographed... I don't know. They help for sure but if you have an opportunity to buy a non IS, non USM lens for a good price, seriously consider it.

What tripod do you have? If it is not sturdy enough to hold the weight of your camera then replacing it may be a cheaper option than buying a new lens.
_MB_ is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 24-08-2007, 17:18   #7 (permalink)
Pixalo Crew
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 19,250
Steve is just really nice
Steve is just really niceSteve is just really niceSteve is just really niceSteve is just really niceSteve is just really niceSteve is just really niceSteve is just really niceSteve is just really niceSteve is just really niceSteve is just really nice

Image edit - ASK
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 17-55 f2.8 USM or...?

No problem with being a nOOb, we all started somewhere and keep learning every day. Asking questions is the best way to find answers and learn

IS will not help you for long exposures, its there to help eliminate camera shake from slow shutter speeds when hand holding. Its not capable of stopping camera shake on a time exposure shot take from a tripod, in fact with only a few exceptions Canon recommends switching off IS when shooting from a Tripod.

To solve the issue you simply need a better, more sturdy tripod and use either remote shutter release or the timer function on the camera. Both of these tips will totally remove the shake induced by you manually pressing the shutter release button.

To further reduce the possibility of introducing movement, also look to see if your camera has mirror lock up, if it does use that as well. this will stop any vibrations from the mirror being moved out of the way as the sensor captures the image.

If you are shooting landscapes at dusk, you'll need to use longer shutter times if you wish to maintain control of the final results and have a large depth of field, there simply is no short cuts for that.

IS comes into its own when you are shooting at longer lengths...so for the wildlife shooting hand held it can be really effective.

USM is the type of motor to drive the autofocus mechanisms in Canon lenses. Its their top option and USM usually means that lenses will focus very fast and silently. It will have little effect on the quality of the shot but could (especially with wildlife) mean the difference between getting and missing a shot.

Hope that helps a little
__________________
I can count all the way up to Potato.
Steve is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 24-08-2007, 17:29   #8 (permalink)
New here
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 38
pwrbkdude is on a distinguished roadpwrbkdude is on a distinguished road
User's Gallery
Re: Canon 17-55 f2.8 USM or...?

You guys rock!

I mainly use the 18-55 kit lens that came with my Rebel XT and that is my usual lens for landscape work. I find that it lacks sharpness, and that is what I am trying to find truly, to have sharper results. A little wider might be nice too.

My other lens is a really cheap piece of **** Sigma 70-300 with Macro. Works great for flowers, etc. But last fall I came upon several loons floating down a river at dusk. 300mm wasn't really close enough to fill the frame, and with the shutter speed required at dusk, there was too much vibration and the resulting frames, well, sucked.

I don't really have a ton of money to spend, and those are my situations! Maybe that will allow for better advice???? By the way, this is by far the best photo forum I have come across!
pwrbkdude is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 24-08-2007, 17:39   #9 (permalink)
Loves the place
 
silkstone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Silkstone Common, Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 5,719
silkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of light
silkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of light

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 17-55 f2.8 USM or...?

I'll add my vote for the 17-40 f/4L. It's a superb lens that will be even more useful if you ever want to move to full-frame. It's also weatherproof.

With the good high-ISO performance of the latest cameras, a fast lens isn't as important as it was. After all, f/2.8 to f/4 is only the difference between ISO 100 and 200. An f/2.8 lens will also be larger and heavier (assuming the same image circle), and more expensive.

I love IS but it isn't so necessary at shorter focal lengths, and on a tripod you're supposed to switch it off (although I don't). It comes into its own above about 100mm, and if you can run to it I'd strongly recommend the Canon 70-300 IS. Longer than 300mm and you're really into big bucks for something decent, and you may need a yak.
silkstone is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 24-08-2007, 17:41   #10 (permalink)
Forum Regular
 
_MB_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Northumberland, UK
Posts: 952
_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 17-55 f2.8 USM or...?

300mm on an Xti is nearly equivalent to 500mm effective focal length, which was and still is a common focal length of wildlife photographers when everything was film based.

There's nothing wrong with using a 70-300 cheap zoom to begin with. I used a Sigma 135-400 for a long time and before that a manual 500mm f8 mirror lens. Were the loons aware of you and consequently manoeuvring further into the river to maintain a good distance? If so that's not an equipment problem, it's a stalking problem.

If you've got the cash then by all means go out and buy a 500f4 L but like you said, you don't and I'm just trying to make sure you don't run before you can walk. Large aperture teles are hard work. They're heavy, you're working with vanishingly small depth of field when photographing near subjects, even the modern advantages listed above don't guarantee good results. I could get good results from mine but it was time consuming and tiring so I sold the lens and bought some binoculars instead

So yeah. Think about it seriously is all I'm saying
_MB_ is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 24-08-2007, 19:14   #11 (permalink)
New here
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 38
pwrbkdude is on a distinguished roadpwrbkdude is on a distinguished road
User's Gallery
Re: Canon 17-55 f2.8 USM or...?

ok, so the 17-40L kinda sounds like the way to go. No one anywhere I can find really has anything bad to say about it, and it is generally "affordable". Do you folks normally have something to cover say the 40-70 or 40-100 range?
pwrbkdude is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 24-08-2007, 19:49   #12 (permalink)
Loves the place
 
silkstone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Silkstone Common, Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 5,719
silkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of light
silkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of lightsilkstone is a glorious beacon of light

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 17-55 f2.8 USM or...?

I have a Tamron 18-200 which is a great general purpose lens, and the Canon 50mm f/1.8. I've never really found the need for anything between 50 and 70 - in Ye Olde Days (before decent zooms) you'd have had a 50 and something like 80.
silkstone is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 24-08-2007, 21:31   #13 (permalink)
Been here a while
 
KenCo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Co. Durham
Posts: 300
KenCo will become famous soon enoughKenCo will become famous soon enoughKenCo will become famous soon enoughKenCo will become famous soon enoughKenCo will become famous soon enough

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 17-55 f2.8 USM or...?

I can't give you a detailed review as I don't feel I know enough about photography to do so but.....I own the 17-55 f2.8 is usm and had to think long and hard over this and the 17-40L usm. I shoot mainly landscapes but wanted to try more portraits and maybe even weddings and it's that, that swayed me in the end to buy the 17-55. I done a lot of reading and did find some who were not happy with the 17-40 and those not happy with the 17-55 only really complained about the price and lack of hood included in said price.
The build quality compared to the 17-40 is noticeable (apparently, as I don't and never have owned one...Going straight from the kit lens like yourself) However weather sealing is lacking but only useful if your camera has it too though I haven't noticed any dust issues as of yet. Also, the Image stabilization DOES work on tripod, as it is the new generation IS (Just quoting what i've read) I have IS switched on at all times (even when not needed) on both the 17-55 & 70-200. There are problems with flare, again though, I got as much flare in similar circumstances with the kit lens. Sharpness though is amazing, I was quite happy with the kit lens really but once you try a lens of this quality you will wonder how you got along with the kit lens.....Just amazing!
If you are considering going full frame at some point, this lens won't fit....EFS only! and based on that i'd choose the 17-40. If you'd like to shoot indoors/low light conditions.....then F2.8 And IS as well as an extra 15mm is the way to go.
I have never tried the 17-40 but am more than happy with what I have now and if I had to do it again I would.

A couple of reviews for you.

(*Mod comment* - Sorry Ken, links to competing sites are against Pixalo policy.)

I'm sure if you do a search on Google for comparison shots from both lenses may help.

Last edited by Sonsey; 25-08-2007 at 00:10. Reason: removed competing links
KenCo is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 25-08-2007, 11:09   #14 (permalink)
Been here a while
 
KenCo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Co. Durham
Posts: 300
KenCo will become famous soon enoughKenCo will become famous soon enoughKenCo will become famous soon enoughKenCo will become famous soon enoughKenCo will become famous soon enough

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 17-55 f2.8 USM or...?

Sorry guys.
KenCo is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 25-08-2007, 11:42   #15 (permalink)
Forum Regular
 
_MB_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Northumberland, UK
Posts: 952
_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 17-55 f2.8 USM or...?

I notice there are no reviews of the 17-55 on Pixalo - if you really must remove information from other sites would it not be at least worth replacing it with some own brand stuff?
_MB_ is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 25-08-2007, 15:24   #16 (permalink)
Feet under the table
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Maidenhead
Posts: 2,145
brian wright22 has a spectacular aura aboutbrian wright22 has a spectacular aura aboutbrian wright22 has a spectacular aura aboutbrian wright22 has a spectacular aura aboutbrian wright22 has a spectacular aura aboutbrian wright22 has a spectacular aura aboutbrian wright22 has a spectacular aura aboutbrian wright22 has a spectacular aura aboutbrian wright22 has a spectacular aura aboutbrian wright22 has a spectacular aura aboutbrian wright22 has a spectacular aura about

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 17-55 f2.8 USM or...?

Great idea MB, so you know what to do now, borrow one and give us your thoughts
Brian
brian wright22 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 25-08-2007, 16:03   #17 (permalink)
Forum Regular
 
_MB_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Northumberland, UK
Posts: 952
_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 17-55 f2.8 USM or...?

If you have one lying about I'll do so
_MB_ is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 25-08-2007, 16:16   #18 (permalink)
Feet under the table
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Maidenhead
Posts: 2,145
brian wright22 has a spectacular aura aboutbrian wright22 has a spectacular aura aboutbrian wright22 has a spectacular aura aboutbrian wright22 has a spectacular aura aboutbrian wright22 has a spectacular aura aboutbrian wright22 has a spectacular aura aboutbrian wright22 has a spectacular aura aboutbrian wright22 has a spectacular aura aboutbrian wright22 has a spectacular aura aboutbrian wright22 has a spectacular aura aboutbrian wright22 has a spectacular aura about

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 17-55 f2.8 USM or...?

No I need some honest persons experience and usage of the 17-55mm 2.5 lens.
brian wright22 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 25-08-2007, 16:20   #19 (permalink)
Forum Regular
 
_MB_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Northumberland, UK
Posts: 952
_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about_MB_ has a spectacular aura about

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 17-55 f2.8 USM or...?

Oh well I've got a great link I can let you.. oh.. nevermind.
_MB_ is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 25-08-2007, 21:40   #20 (permalink)
Been here a while
 
KenCo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Co. Durham
Posts: 300
KenCo will become famous soon enoughKenCo will become famous soon enoughKenCo will become famous soon enoughKenCo will become famous soon enoughKenCo will become famous soon enough

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 17-55 f2.8 USM or...?

Quote:
Originally Posted by _MB_ View Post
If you have one lying about I'll do so
Well i'd loan you mine but I know that when you've finished the review it would break your heart to return it
Don't worry guys, i'll TRY and write something for the review section....Please just bear in mind I am no lens geek!!!
KenCo is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 26-08-2007, 20:44   #21 (permalink)
Loves the place
 
Rob Barron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Poole, Dorset
Posts: 7,227
Rob Barron is a name known to allRob Barron is a name known to allRob Barron is a name known to allRob Barron is a name known to all
Rob Barron is a name known to allRob Barron is a name known to allRob Barron is a name known to allRob Barron is a name known to allRob Barron is a name known to allRob Barron is a name known to allRob Barron is a name known to allRob Barron is a name known to allRob Barron is a name known to allRob Barron is a name known to allRob Barron is a name known to all

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 17-55 f2.8 USM or...?

I'd defintiely go with the others on getting an EF 17-40mm f4 L series lens. It is a cracking bit of glass for its price and the wide aperture of f2.8 is rather unnecessary for landscapes where you are generally looking for a decent depth of field. f4 is still pretty bright so hand-holding is ok.... though no question that tripods make all the difference for a landscape, no matter how good the light.

There is a new IS kit lens coming with the 40D which is definitely better than the standard lens that was previously available. It is f3.5-5.6 at the extremes of its 18-55mm range but the IS will make that of less importance. This is a much cheaper option for people who don't have a large budget available but want a reasonable lens so for 120-ish you won't go far wrong. That said, I stress it is NOT an L series lens so should not be compared to the 17-40mm as its glass is of a very different quality.

If you have the money for the 17-40mm lens, I'd go that route for sure.... and have!

In terms of covering the mid-range, I have the older 28-70mm f2.8, now replaced on the market with the 24-70mm lens, still the same aperture but also better weather sealing. Either way it is an L series lens and will get you great shots. I am not a bit gan of larger ranged standard zooms and have not been over impressed with reviews I have read of lenses like 24mm-135mm but that is only from reading, not from personal use so others might have different views if they have one.

Cheers,
Rob
__________________
Rob Barron

I love being a photographer: it's the only job where you can legally shoot people and cut their heads off
Rob Barron is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 28-08-2007, 00:28   #22 (permalink)
Pixalo Crew
 
dabhand16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Dunstable Bedfordshire UK
Posts: 30,298
dabhand16 is a glorious beacon of lightdabhand16 is a glorious beacon of lightdabhand16 is a glorious beacon of light
dabhand16 is a glorious beacon of lightdabhand16 is a glorious beacon of lightdabhand16 is a glorious beacon of lightdabhand16 is a glorious beacon of lightdabhand16 is a glorious beacon of light

Image editing O.K.
User's Gallery
Users Camera Equipment List
Re: Canon 17-55 f2.8 USM or...?

Have you seen this?
dabhand16 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Second Hand Canon 20D v New Canon 400D nk3905 Which Camera Should I Buy? 13 02-06-2007 11:06
Handled the Canon 5D, Canon 30D & Nikon 200D today Dave Which Camera Should I Buy? 5 03-10-2006 19:47
Canon 30d wins Canon/Nikon race barrymoir General photography questions and answers 7 13-01-2006 17:51
Canon Professional Newsletter Issue 14 - not just for Canon users Adrian General photography questions and answers 3 28-08-2005 19:12


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 19:09.


vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
ReviewPost & PhotoPost vB3 Enhanced, Copyright 2003-2014 All Enthusiast, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.3.0
Copyright 2006 - 2017 Pixalo.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197